From RPG Shortcomings To A RPG Renaissance?

Thanks to GameSpot for their 'GameSpotting' guest editorial, focusing on the alleged inferiority of the RPG genre, and the 'hybrid' games which use these RPG elements to great effect. The writer suggest: "Unlike most games, there is almost no skill required in RPGs - no hand-eye coordination, no button-timing", and while calling RPGs "inferior to other kinds of games", still finds addiction and praise in the "sense of power and accomplishment that comes from seeing your puny character grow from a weakling into an ass-kicking machine." But he finds hybrid titles, such as "first-person shooters [that] are starting to incorporate upgradable skills and character classes", to be examples of a "RPG renaissance", suggesting: "Game developers are starting to realize that almost every game can include and would benefit from RPG elements."

Comments

You don't know how right you are

[Rayonic]

Gamespot actually did a review of Chess on April Fools Day a couple of years ago. I can't find it on their site anymore, but I managed to find this text-only mirror. Here is a highly amusing excerpt:

CHESS
By Greg Kasavin

The latest offering in the rapidly overflowing strategy genre is hard evidence that strategy games need a real overhaul, and fast. Chess, a small-scale tactical turn-based strategy game, attempts to adopt the age-old "easy to learn, difficult to master" parameter made popular by Tetris. But the game's cumbersome play mechanics and superficial depth and detail all add up to a game that won't keep you busy for long.

. . .

Re: Stupid article.

[Black Parrot]

> I hope the author knows what "RPG" stands for

He thinks it stands for "Rocket Propelled Grenade", and requires "no hand-eye coordination, no button-timing" because of it's area effect.

(He probably goes for the chain gun, and thinks it requires "skill" because at least one of the bullets has to hit something.)